Networks or structures? : organizing cultural routes around heritage values : case studies from Poland

The most common way of managing cultural heritage recently takes form of cultural routes as they seem to offer a new model of participation in culture to their recipients; they are often a peculiar anchor point for inhabitants to let them understand their identity and form the future; they offer actual tours to enter into interaction with culture and history, to build together that creation of the heritage, which so is becoming not only a touristic product, but, first of all, the space for cultural, social and civic activity. Yet, so far, according to what we know, the research problem concerning the method of cultural route organization (points on the route) into solid structures or more of the networked nature, has not been deliberated. A question arises, what values are brought by routes and how to organize routes to be the carriers of the values important for communities, where routes are functioning. And, as a consequence, if, from the point of view of the values of local communities, organizing solid route structures or organizing more widely-spaced, network-based routes would bring effects and what those effects would be. Thus, the posed question is of course scientifically imprecise because a network is a type of structure but presents a given direction for the development of cultural route structures. Our objective here is to present a certain solidity and rigidity of structure with dynamic and smooth understanding of the network. The research presented in the article is based on 3 case studies. We have selected for this purpose the three largest cultural routes in Poland, organized to various degrees. The outcome of the research was referred also to other cultural route organization research

Sales promotions and channel coordination

Consumer sales promotions are usually the result of the decisions of two marketing channel parties, the manufacturer and the retailer. In making these decisions, each party normally follows its own interest: i.e. maximizes its own profit. Unfortunately, this results in a suboptimal outcome for the channel as a whole. Independent profit maximization by channel parties leads to a lack of channel coordination with the implication of leaving money on the table. This may well contribute to the notoriously low profitability of sales promotions. This paper first shows analytically why the suboptimality occurs, and then presents an empirical demonstration, using a unique dataset from an Efficient Consumer Response (ECR) project; ECR is a movement in which parties work together to optimize the distribution channel). In this dataset, actual profit is only a small fraction of potential profit, implying that there is a large degree of suboptimality. It is important that (1) channel parties are aware of this suboptimality; and (2) that they have tools to deal with it. Solutions to the channel coordination problem should ensure that the goals of the individual channel parties are aligned with the goals of the channel as a whole. The paper proposes one particular agreement for this purpose, called proportional discount sharing. Application to the ECR data shows a win-win result for both the manufacturer and the retailer. Recognition of the channel coordination problem by the manufacturer and the retailer is the necessary starting point for agreeing on a way of solving it in a win-win fashion

Network capitalism and the role of strategy, contracts and performance expectations for Asia-Pacific innovation partnerships

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018. With the growth of emerging economies in Asia-Pacific over the last three decades collaboration with the aim of innovation between firms within and with partners outside the region have developed substantially. Not always have such partnerships fulfilled their anticipated strategic objectives. The literature suggests that the nature of market arrangements and the role of government within that system play a role, but also innate contracting practices and governance of innovation partnerships are related. Yet, our understanding about the specific relationships between these factors and the emerging partnership innovation culture that facilitates joint business activities in an Asia-Pacific context remains vague. In this conceptual chapter we suggest how characteristics of so called network capitalism in conjunction with the nature of contractual agreements between partners, the alignment of their innovation objectives and the ambiguity inherent in their mutual contributions to the partnership can be interpreted as indicators of joint innovation culture. However, while innovation partnerships generally may result to be bureaucratic, market, clan, or adhocracy, we discuss how in an Asia Pacific context, innovation partnerships are limited by the extent of codification and diffusion of information and the social embeddedness of economic transactions